Israeli Duty to Warn? What unmitigated gall (chutzpah)

[Revoltingest]

I tell you what is sick .. trying to justify killing masses of people in bombing raids and destroying the vast majority of buildings and infrastructure, because they apparently didn't secure their 'Gaza prison' properly!

You'll notice that the typical Zionist doesn't
acknowledge Israel's acts leading up to Oct 7.
Decades of murder, torture, oppression, apartheid,
imprisonment without trial, & group punishment.
And in the year preceding Oct 7, Israel had been
increasing its violence.
They never recognize that Israel's wrongful conduct
is a direct cause of violent resistance & retaliation.
To them, Israel is both saint & victim. And the
Arabs / Muslims are lazy, violent, corrupt aggressors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So how do you totally eradicate Hamas? I think an international force must step in and take over for Israel. This international force can take it's time, minimize "civilian" casualties, be under international scrutiny, all the good things, but it must completely remove Hamas from Gaza. Once that's done, it must stay in Gaza and make sure no terrorist organizations return.

You misuse the facepalm emoji and then want answers? Think again. **mod edit**

 

[icehorse]

Why is "civilian" in quotes?

How would you categorize them? Were they captives of Hamas? If so, then before 10/7, when thousands of them traveled to their good jobs in Israel every day, why didn't they tell Israelis what was going on in Gaza?

 

[Debater Slayer]

How would you categorize them?

As civilians.

Were they captives of Hamas?

They lived under Hamas' rule of the strip.

If so, then before 10/7, when thousands of them traveled to their good jobs in Israel every day, why didn't they tell Israelis what was going on in Gaza?

What do you mean by "what was going on"? That Hamas ruled Gaza? Israel already knew. That Hamas was planning to attack Israel? That attack was kept hidden from almost the entire world, let alone an average citizen in Gaza.

Also, the Israeli government is seen as a hostile and abusive entity by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and given its decades-old policies and illegal occupation of the latter, I don't find that surprising in the least.

My question was direct: why is "civilian" in quotes?

To put it even more directly, are you trying to imply that regular Gazans are not civilians and that, therefore, bombing them should be considered acceptable?

 

[icehorse]

You'll notice that the typical Zionist doesn't
acknowledge Israel's acts leading up to Oct 7.
Decades of murder, torture, oppression, apartheid,
imprisonment without trial, & group punishment.
And in the year preceding Oct 7, Israel had been
increasing its violence.
They never recognize that Israel's wrongful conduct
is a direct cause of violent resistance & retaliation.
To them, Israel is both saint & victim. And the
Arabs / Muslims are lazy, violent, corrupt aggressors.

So many dubious assumptions in your post. But let's start with this:

What's YOUR definition of a Zionist? It seems that you use it as a disparaging term?

 

[muhammad_isa]

What's YOUR definition of a Zionist?

What's yours? Chosen people .. promised land .. greater Israel etc. etc.

 

[icehorse]

The Israeli government is seen as a hostile and abusive entity by the majority of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, and given its decades-old policies and illegal occupation of the latter, I don't find that surprising in the least.

My question was direct: why is "civilian" in quotes?

To put it even more directly, are you trying to imply that regular Gazans are not civilians and that, therefore, bombing them should be considered acceptable?

At what point does a "civilian" become an enemy combatant of some sort? Does aiding and abetting a terrorist organization year after year disqualify a person from being considered a "civilian". If not, how do YOU propose the line should be drawn?

Further, if you consider Palestinians to be "civilians", then why has Egypt treated them the way they have for the last 15+ years?

 

[Revoltingest]

Why is "civilian" in quotes?

This is an interesting aspect of the conflict.
I note that Israel has near universal conscription
for its military. Many of the hostages are former
soldiers, & would've partaken in oppression of
Palestinians.
If the civilian status of Palestinians is to be doubted,
then it should be so for Israelis, whose current &
former soldiers are deeply embedded in the "civilian"
population.
The point here is that it's bogus to rationalize treating
all Palestinians as non-civilians, & that they may be
killed as terrorists.

 

[icehorse]

You misuse the facepalm emoji and then want answers? Think again. **mod edit**

I don't think I misused the emoji. **mod edit**

 

[Revoltingest]

So many dubious assumptions in your post. But let's start with this:

What's YOUR definition of a Zionist?

You're free to use a dictionary.
You'll find my definition there.

It seems that you use it as a disparaging term?

Sounds like someone takes offense
at criticism of Zionist views & acts.
I use the term to describe what you
find in the definition.


You've done this before, ie, making the
discussion about peripheral things
that go nowhere. I won't play.

 

[Debater Slayer]

At what point does a "civilian" become an enemy combatant of some sort? Does aiding and abetting a terrorist organization year after year disqualify a person from being considered a "civilian". If not, how do YOU propose the line should be drawn?

You still haven't answered the question. Let me put it another way in case the last wording wasn't direct enough: The Gaza Strip has over two million people. Are the vast majority of them civilians or not? Do you think it's acceptable to bomb them or not?

I'm not sure how you have reached the conclusion that average Gazans have "aided and abetted" Hamas. The list of attempts to demonize and dehumanize Muslims and Palestinians seems to grow by the day at this point. Everyone who voted for Netanyahu, for example, "aided and abetted" him to reach power. Do you think that means they're not civilians even if they're not participating in combat? What about reservists who are not currently in the military? I think all of those are still civilians as long as they're not participating in military actions.

The line should be drawn at participation in combat. That's my position, and I have stated it unequivocally. I'm waiting to read yours.

Further, if you consider Palestinians to be "civilians", then why has Egypt treated them the way they have for the last 15+ years?

I don't set government policy, nor are any country's policies the basis for my opinions. The questions I asked above still stand.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think I misused the emoji. **mod edit**

You have demonstrated a very biased perspective here. No one has said that Hamas is innocent. That is obviously wrong. But you seem to ignore how Israel is very wrong in how they deal with the Palestinians too. Both sides have to be able to exist. Both sides have valid claims to live in the area. One cannot just support one side. If one supports Israel no matter what then there is no real difference between that person and a supporter of Hamas. Israel is partially to blame for the terroristic attacks on them since they give them no other way to make those wrongs known to the world. How aware were you of the terrible conditions at the Gaza strip before their attack? I would support a peace enforced on both sides by the UN since they cannot seem to come to a peace on their own. Israel does not want that because they know that they have abused their power when it comes to the lands. They would be pushed back as Palestinians were returned some of their lands. Unfortunately the Palestinians, due to generations of abuse by the Israelis, have far too many that think that an eradication of Israel is justified. The position of neither side is justified which is why the UN should move in. Though that might cause military opposition from Israel itself.

So, talks first with forced conversations from both sides and if both sides cannot come up with a solution then a forced change by the UN. The might have to go back to the original border boundaries with people forced to emigrate from both sides. Allowing things to go on as they are now is not the answer.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The point here is that it's bogus to rationalize treating
all Palestinians as non-civilians, & that they may be
killed as terrorists.

Most of the logic I have seen used in attempts to demonize Palestinian civilians has been nothing short of mass-murder apologetics. It is almost the mirror image of the logic many al-Qaeda supporters used to justify 9/11 and the 2005 London bombings: "They voted for governments that invaded other countries, so they're complicit and deserve to be targeted. They're not civilians."

The targets of fanaticism and murder apologetics may differ, but much of the underlying logic remains the same.

 

[icehorse]

You have demonstrated a very biased perspective here

So have you, but you seem to think that because you agree with a popular opinion you don't have to show us your own work

 

[icehorse]

You still haven't answered the question. Let me put it another way in case the last wording wasn't direct enough: The Gaza Strip has over two million people. Are the vast majority of them civilians or not? Do you think it's acceptable to bomb them or not?

Am I wrong to think that we're having a two-sided debate?

 

[icehorse]

You've done this before, ie, making the
discussion about peripheral things
that go nowhere. I won't play.

You seem to think that context doesn't matter. Context is EVERYTHING

 

[icehorse]

So, talks first with forced conversations from both sides and if both sides cannot come up with a solution then a forced change by the UN. The might have to go back to the original border boundaries with people forced to emigrate from both sides. Allowing things to go on as they are now is not the answer.

It would appear that you and I are mostly in agreement here, as per the idea I put forth in post #218.

But my opinion is a bit stronger. I think that the blood spilled in this war is entirely on the hands of the UN.

 

[Kathryn]

They were fooled. We elected Trump. He is not much better. People make mistakes. And now they have suffered for it. But the people to punish are those that misled them and broke international law. Imprison them. Don't harm civilians. And especially not children who had nothing to do with the decision making process.

No side is innocent here. I do not want Israel to become the monster that Hamas currently is.

The last parliamentary elections in Gaza were nearly 20 years ago.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Am I wrong to think that we're having a two-sided debate?

I answered the questions in your post and stated my position directly. You haven't answered mine or unequivocally stated your position.

So far, it doesn't seem to me to have been a two-sided debate, since you refuse to straightforwardly say where you stand.

 

[icehorse]

The line should be drawn at participation in combat. That's my position, and I have stated it unequivocally. I'm waiting to read yours.

I believe you, but this is the first time I've heard your position, so if you've repeated it here, my sincere thanks!

My position isn't as black and white as yours, but I would say that a person can lose their "civilian" label if they are aiding and / or abetting terrorists.

If you say that Gazans have had no choice but to aid Hamas for the last 20 years, then again, their blood is on the UN's hands, because EVERYONE has know for years and years that Hamas was using aid money to build it's war machine.

If Gazans have had a choice in aiding Hamas, then they are no longer civilians, IMO.